The Life of Samuel Johnson (English Library) [Abridged] [Paperback]

There are of course many positives, or I wouldn't have given it 5 stars two years ago. Boswell had a strong talent for recording Johnson's conversations, and they are wonderful. Some of them are down right hilarious! Boswell was also a bit of a dramatist, setting up situations such as Johnson's meeting with Wilkes, placing bets over whether he would challenge Johnson on his habit of hiding orange peels. And Boswell could tell a story very dramatically - - it's his dramatic skills and memory which have been the basis on which his champions have defended him.

However, as a 'biography' this leaves much to be desired. Not just the issue of scope, with some 80% of the pages being on 20 years of Johnson's life. Boswell just wasn't a biographer, his story is too personal, he inadequately integrates important opinions, and he suppresses important information that's inconsistent with his rather simple view of Johnson. As Richard Schwartz has excellently pointed out, Boswell has presented us with an unshaped series of details, where data do not converge to a whole, and remain undigested.

Inaccuracies: Boswell tells us early on that he sometimes scurried across London to verify a date, but he apparently wouldn't consult a perpetual calendar; there are a number of occasions where his dates don't align with the day of week, yet his certainty in dating events make it all sound so true. And there is the famous blooper of his putting Johnson at Oxford for three years, rather than one. The inaccuracies would not be such an issue were it not for the fact that Boswell positions himself as being definitive, and condemns the efforts of John Hawkins and Hester Thrale as being inaccurate. Both of them saw aspects of Johnson whihc Boswell never had the depth to see and understand.

Repositioning: Boswell the story teller shaped events... There is an important event where Johnson meets the King in the King's library. Boswell makes it sound as if the King was completely focused on Johnson, and no one else was there - - as if it was a private audience (yet it certainly wasn't). To read this book, you would think that Boswell was one of the most important people in Johnson's life; while Boswell certainly mattered to Johnson, there are very few descriptions of Johnson's life without Boswell, as if Johnson were more dependent on Boswell than the reverse. But the total number of days they were together was a very small fraction of Johnson's life.

Suppression of details: Boswell is so intent on describing Johnson's devotion to his departed wife, that he never tells us that Johnson had hoped to remarry, or that later in life he made advances to a memebr of his household. Boswell also won't relay lifelong friend Edmund Hector's concern that at one point Johnson was so depressed that Hector feared it might shorten his life. These details don't fit Boswell's simple view of Johnson - - and when someone like Anna Seward would send him anecdotes with a disturbing tone, Boswell wrote it off to "prejudice." We also know now that Hawkins, who knew Johnson long before Boswell, wrote a bio of Johnson that has been unfairly eclipsed, largely because of Boswell's treatment and Boswell's unquestioned authority.

Even for the years that Boswell -did- know Johnson, his record is far from complete. Johnson recovered from one major period of depression by being immersed in family life with the Thrales, yet Boswell never spent much time at their household, and so never really saw that 'family' side of Johnson.

Should you avoid this like the plague? No, not at all. But the full unabridged edition represents quite a commitment, and you might be better off reading the abridged version, and spending the time saved by reading Bate's biogrpahy, or even Johnson's own writings.

(In writing this review, I've been very influenced by various books & articles by Donald Greene & Richard Schwartz; I've also tried to be sensitive to the defenses of such Boswell defenders as Frederick Pottle.)